STUDIES IN EDUCATION POLICY - Fraser Institute...To order additional copies of Studies in Education...

STUDIES IN EDUCATIONPOLICY

A FRASER INSTITUTE OCCASIONAL PAPER

FEBRUARY 2003

Report Card on Albertas

Elementary Schools

2003 Edition

Peter Cowley and Stephen Easton

ContentsIntroduction .............................................................................................................. 3

A measure of academic effectiveness for schools .......................................................... 5

Other indicators of school performance ...................................................................... 7

Notes ........................................................................................................................ 9

Detailed school results ................................................................................................ 10

Ranking the schools ................................................................................................... 92

Appendix 1: Calculating the Overall rating out of 10 ................................................... 108

Appendix 2: Calculating the Value added indicators ................................................... 110

About the authors ...................................................................................................... 113

Studies in Education Policy are published periodically throughout the year by The Fraser Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

The Fraser Institute is an independent Canadian economic and social research and educational organization. It has as its objective the redirection of public att ention to the role of competitive markets in providing for the well-being of Canadians. Where markets work, the Institutes interest lies in trying to discover prospects for improvement. Where markets do not work, its interest lies in Þ nding the reasons. Where competitive markets have been replaced by government control, the interest of the Institute lies in documenting objec-tively the nature of the improvement or deterioration resulting from government intervention. The work of the Institute is assisted by an Editorial Advisory Board of internationally renowned economists. The Fraser Institute is a national, federally chartered non-proÞ t organization Þ nanced by the sale of its publications and the tax-deductible contributions of its members, foundations, and other supporters; it receives no gov-ernment funding.

For information about membership in The Fraser Institute, please contact the Development Department via mail to: The Fraser Institute, 4th Floor, 1770 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC, V6J 3G7; via telephone: 604.688.0221 ext. 586; via fax: 604.688.8539; via e-mail: [email protected].

In Calgary, please contact us via telephone: 403.216.7175 or, toll-free 1.866.716.7175; via fax: 403.234.9010; via e-mail: [email protected].

In Toronto, please contact us via telephone: 416.363.6575; via fax: 416.601.7322.

To order additional copies of Studies in Education Policy, any of our other publications, or a catalogue of the Institutes publications, please contact the book sales coordinator via our toll-free order line: 1.800.665.3558, ext. 580; via telephone: 604.688.0221, ext. 580; via fax: 604.688.8539; via e-mail: [email protected].

For media enquiries, please contact Suzanne Walters, Director of Communications via telephone: 604.714.4582 or, from Toronto, 416.363.6575, ext. 582; via e-mail: [email protected]

To learn more about the Institute, please visit our web site at www.fraserinstitute.ca.

Copyright© 2003 The Fraser Institute. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any manner whatsoever without writt en permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

The authors of this study have worked independently and opinions expressed by them are, therefore, their own, and do not necessarily reß ect the opinions of the members or trustees of The Fraser Institute.

Editing and design: Kristin McCahon and Lindsey Thomas MartinPrinted and bound in Canada.ISSN 14921863.

Date of issue: February 2003

AcknowledgmentsThe Fraser Institute wishes to acknowledge the generous support for this project from the Max Bell Foun-dation. Thanks also to the employees of Alberta Learning for their help in the acquisition and veriÞ cation of the data upon which this Report Card is based.

3

Introduction

The Report Card on Albertas Elementary Schools: 2003 Edition (hereaft er, Report Card) collects a variety of relevant, objective indicators of school performance into one, easily accessible public document so that anyone can analyze and compare the performance of individual schools. By doing so, the Report Card assists parents when they choose a school for their children and encourages and assists all those seek-ing to improve their schools.

The Fraser Institutes report cards are now well established in Canada. In the United States, the de-partments of education in 49 states publish annual report cards on schoolsfor all school levelsmany of which are not dissimilar to the Institutes series. In the United Kingdom, the national Department for Education and Skills publishes a wide variety of data on school performance.

Report cards on schools are becoming common-place. But, are they eff ective? Certainly, anecdotal evidence provided to the authors by parents and school administrators conÞ rm their usefulness. Further, research suggests that real gains in school performance can result from their introduction. In an article published in 2001, Caroline Hoxby,1 a Harvard professor of Economics well known for her work related to education, showed that stu-dents in American states that published report cards experienced faster improvement in their scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) than did students in states that did not publish report cards. Hoxby concludes,

Statewide standardized tests and school report cards may be unpleasant for ineff ectual educators, but they should not be controversial with parents or policy makers who want to see higher achieve-ment. Schools conduct themselves bett er when their constituents are informed.

The Report Card can help parents choose

Where parents can choose among several schools for their children, the Report Card provides a valu-able tool for making a decision. Because it makes comparisons easy, the Report Card alerts parents to those nearby schools that appear to have more eff ec-tive academic programs. Parents can also determine whether or not schools of interest are improving over time. By Þ rst studying the Report Card, parents will be bett er prepared to ask relevant questions when they interview the principal and teachers at the schools under consideration.

Of course, the choice of a school should not be made solely on the basis of any one source of information. Families choosing a school for their students should seek to conÞ rm the Report Cards Þ ndings by visiting the school and interviewing teachers and school administrators. In addition, a sound academic program should be complemented by eff ective programs in areas of school activity not measured by the Report Card. Nevertheless, the Re-port Card provides a detailed picture of each school that is not easily available elsewhere.

The Report Card facilitates school improvement

Certainly, the act of publicly rating and ranking schools att racts att ention. This att ention can pro-vide both a carrot and a stick. The results of poorly performing schools generate concern as do those whose performance is deteriorating. Schools that perform well or show consistent improvement are applauded. This inevitable att ention provides an

4 Report Card on Albertas Elementary Schools2003 Edition

incentive for all those connected with a school to focus on student results.

However, the Report Card off ers more than just incentive. It includes a variety of indicators, each of which reports results for an aspect of school per-formance that might be improved. School adminis-trators who are dedicated to improvement eagerly accept the Report Card as another source of opportu-nities for improvement.

Some schools do better than others

To improve a school, one must believe that improve-ment is achievable. This Report Card, like the Fraser Institutes report cards on secondary schools, pro-vides evidence about what can be accomplished. It demonstrates clearly that, even when we take into account factors such as the students family back-ground, which some believe dictate the degree of academic success that students will have in school, some schools do bett er than others. This Þ nding conÞ rms the results of research carried out in other countries.2 Indeed, it will come as no great surprise to experienced parents and educators that the data consistently suggest that what goes on in the schools makes a diff erence to academic results and that some schools make more of a diff erence than others.

Comparisons are at the heart

of the improvement process

Many elementary school authorities in Alberta provide students and their parents with report cards that include both the students mark and the median mark for each subject in which the student is enrolled. The report cards also show any marks

awarded to the student earlier in the year. Compara-tive and historical data like these enable students and parents to see a clearer picture of the students progress. By comparing a schools results with those of neighbouring schools or of schools with similar school and student characteristics, we can identify more successful schools and learn from them. By comparing a schools latest results with those of earlier years, we can see if the school is improving. Reference to overall provincial results places an individual schools level of achievement in a broader context.

There is great beneÞ t in identifying schools that are particularly eff ective. By studying the techniques used in schools where students are successful, less eff ective schools may Þ nd ways to improve. This advantage is not lost on the United Kingdoms Department of Education and Skills. Its Beacon Schools program3 identiÞ es schools across the country that have demonstrated expertise in a wide variety of challenging aspects of the manage-ment of schools and the teaching and counselling of their students.

Comparisons are at the heart of improvement: making comparisons among schools is made sim-pler and more meaningful by the Report Cards indi-cators, ratings, and rankings.

You can contribute to the development of the Report Card

The Report Card program beneÞ ts from the input of interested parties. We welcome your suggestions, comments, and criticisms. Please contact us via e-mail to: [email protected].

5

A measure of academic effectiveness for schools

The foundation of the Report Card is an overall rat-ing of each schools academic performance. Building on data about student results provided by Alberta Learning (the provincial ministry of education) we rate each school on a scale from zero to 10. We base our overall rating of each schools academic perfor-mance on seven indicators:

(1) average achievement-test marks (percent) in grade-3 language arts;

(2) average achievement-test marks (percent) in grade-3 mathematics;

(3) average achievement-test marks (percent) in grade-6 language arts;

(4) average achievement-test marks (percent) in grade-6 mathematics;

(5) the percentage of achievement tests in (1) to (4) where the results were below the acceptable standard;

(6) the diff erence between male and female students in their average achievement-test mark in grade-6 language arts;

(7) the diff erence between male and female students in their average achievement-test mark in grade-6 mathematics.

We have selected this set of indicators because they provide systematic insight into a schools perfor-mance: because they are based on annually gen-erated data, we can assess not only each schools performance in a year but also its improvement or deterioration over time.

Indicators of effective teachingAverage achievement-test marks

These indicators (in the tables Average exam mark) re-port the average percentage achieved by a schools students on the uniform achievement tests in two core subject areas. For each school, each indica-tor is the average score (expressed as a percentage) achieved by all of the schools students who complet-ed the tests in the language arts and mathematics achievement tests at the grade-3 and grade-6 levels.

Fundamental to the mission of elementary schools is teaching its students sound basic skills in reading, writing, and mathematics. Basic litera-cy and numeracy are essential building blocks for life-long learning. The tests upon which the Report Card is based assess students on these dimensions. Examinations are designed to achieve a distribu-tion of results reß ecting the diff erences in students mastery of this course work. Diff erences among students in abilities, motivation, and work-habits will inevitably have some impact upon the Þ nal re-sults. There are, however, recognizable diff erences from school to school within a district in the aver-age results on the achievement tests. There is also variation within schools in the results obtained in diff erent subject areas. Such diff erences in outcomes cannot be wholly explained by the individual and family characteristics of the schools students. It seems reasonable, therefore, to include the average test marks in these two critical subject areas as indi-cators of eff ective teaching.

Percentage of achievement tests failed

For each school, this indicator (in the tables Percent-age of exams failed) provides the rate of failure (as a percentage) in the achievement tests. It was derived


by dividing the sum of all the above achievement tests writt en by the schools students where either the score was below the acceptable standard or the test was only partially completed by the total num-ber of such tests writt en by those students.

Since reading, writing, and mathematics are criti-cal to students further intellectual and personal de-velopment, students should, at the minimum, be able to demonstrate that they meet the acceptable stan-dard of performance for their grade in these subject areas. Schools have the responsibility of ensuring that their students are adequately prepared to do so.

How well do the teachers take student differences into account?The Gender gap indicators

Undoubtedly, the personal characteristics of stu-dents can inß uence the way that they learn. Suc-cessful teachers will take into account these char-acteristics as they develop and implement their lesson plans and teaching strategies. The extent to which a schools teachers succeed in this task can be measured by comparing the results of two diff erent groups of students known to exhibit diff erences in their learning patt erns and academic results.4

The relative academic success of boys and girls is a subject of considerable interest in the education establishment as evidenced by the near univer-sal collection of student results data for these two groups of students by ministries of education. The Report Card uses these data to construct the Gender gap indicators.

The Gender gap indicators measure the diff er-ence, if any, between boys and girls in their average marks on achievement tests in grade-6 language arts and mathematics. The indicators report the size of the diff erence and the more successful sex.

In general, how is the school doing, academically? The Overall rating out of 10

While each of the indicators is important, it is al-most always the case that any school does bett er on some indicators than on others. So, just as a teacher must make a decision about a students overall per-formance, we need an overall indicator of school performance (in the tables Overall rating out of 10). Just as teachers combine test scores, homework, and class participation to rate a student, we have com-bined all the indicators to produce an overall school rating. The overall rating of school performance an-swers the question, In general, how is the school doing, academically?

To derive this rating, the results for each of the indicators, for each of the Þ ve years were Þ rst stan-dardized. Standardization is a statistical procedure whereby sets of raw data with diff erent character-istics are converted into sets of values with stan-dard statistical properties. Standardized values can readily be combined and compared.

The standardized data were then combined where required to produce seven standardized scoresone for each indicatorfor each school, for each year. The seven standardized scores were weighted and combined to produce an overall stan-dardized score. Finally, this score was converted into an overall rating out of 10. It is from this Overall rating out of 10 that the schools provincial rank is determined.

For schools where only boys or girls were en-rolled, there are, of course, no results for the Gender gap indicators. In these cases the Overall rating is de-rived using the remaining Þ ve indicators. (See Ap-pendix 1 for an explanation of the calculation of the Overall rating out of 10.)

7

The Report Card includes other indicators that, while they are not used to derive the Overall rating out of 10, add more information on the schools eff ectiveness.

The Value-added indicators

Value-added measures are designed to show wheth-er or not a school is having a positive eff ect on its students over a period of time. That is, does what happens in schoolteaching, counseling, encour-agement, and the likereally matt er? Do students succeed, at least partly because of the quality of the school or is it simply the case that the children of well-educated, highly motivated parents do rela-tively bett er than all the rest. One way to measure the eff ect of the school is to estimate how much of a given school result is due to the personal character-istics of the students and to their families character-istics and then to assume that the remainder is due to school eff ects.

In the Report Card on Quebecs Secondary Schools--2002 Edition,5 Professor Richard Marceau, co-author of the Report Card, developed a technique to isolate the schools eff ect on the Report Cards Overall rat-ing indicator.6 His analysis used the employment income of the parents to capture family charac-teristics and the proportion of students entering the Secondary IV level (the equivalent of Albertas grade 10) who were older than expected (16 years old or more) to capture the inß uence of individual students characteristics and academic history. Us-ing a technique similar to regression analysis, he reduced the Overall rating by the amount estimated to be associated with the two general non-school ef-fects. The remainder was the portion of the Overall

rating att ributed to school eff ects. He then ranked the schools on this remainder, divided the ranked schools into quartiles, and assigned a lett er grade to the schools in each of the quartiles. Schools that had the greatest eff ect on their studentsthose in the Þ rst quartile of the rankingreceived an A for value-added. Schools ranked in the second quartile had an eff ect that was somewhat above average on their students and received a B. Schools ranked in the third quartile had an eff ect that was somewhat below average and received a C. Those schools that had the least eff ect on their students received a D.

For this Report Card, we have adopted a similar technique using regression analysis to determine the eff ect of schools on student results as evidenced by their relative success in the grade-6 language arts and mathematics provincial achievement tests. The procedure estimates the extent to which the grade-6 results are associated with parents average educa-tion (yrs.)as the measure of student family char-acteristicsand the results achieved by the schools students on the corresponding grade-3 achievement test writt en three years earlieras the measure of combined student characteristics like basic ability, motivation, and prior academic experience. The grade-6 results were then reduced by the amount estimated to be associated with these two non-school eff ects. Finally, the schools were ranked and assigned a lett er grade for value-added as described in the preceding paragraph.

Note that the value-added lett er grade is only an estimate. First, we cannot be certain that every stu-dent at the school in grade 6 was also at the school in grade 3. Second, for schools whose grade-3 classes scored very well or very poorly, it is likely that any change in their level of achievement will be towards

Other indicators of school performance


the average rather than away from it. For instance, at a school where the average test mark for the grade-3 class was in the top 2% of all schools, it would be extremely unlikely that its grade-6 results three years later would be even bett er. Third, there may be reasons unrelated to school performance that explain why grade-6 results at a school will diff er markedly from grade-3 results. For instance, stu-dents at French immersion schools take the grade-3 Language Arts examination in English even though they have not yet received instruction in English. Because they subsequently take instruction in Eng-lish, it is likely that they will show considerable im-provement in that language by the time they take the grade-6 Language Arts Examination.

Nevertheless, the Value added indicator could be useful in that it estimates change over time in school achievement of a particular cohort of stu-dents. Thus, it takes personal and family charac-teristics into account and provides a reasonable measure of the eff ect of the school on the students level of achievement between grades 3 and 6. (See Appendix 2 for further details of the calculation of the Value added indicators.)

The Trend indicator

Is the school improving academically? The Report Card provides six years of data for most schools. Unlike a simple snapshot of one years results, this historical record provides evidence of change (or lack thereof) over time.

To detect trends in the performance indicators, we developed the Trend indicator. This indicator uses statistical analysis to identify those dimen-sions of school performance in which there has likely been real change rather than a ß uctuation in results caused by random occurrences. To calcu-late the trends, the standardized scores rather than raw data are used. Standardizing makes historical data more comparable and the trend measurement more reliable. Because calculation of trends is un-certain when only a small number of data points is available, a trend is indicated only in those circum-

stances for which Þ ve years of data are available and for which it is statistically signiÞ cant. For this indicator, we have deÞ ned the term statistically signiÞ cant to mean that, nine times out of 10, the trend that is noted is real, that is, it did not happen just by chance.

The socio-economic indicator

Educators can and should take into account the abilities, interests, and backgrounds of their stu-dents when they design lesson plans and teach the curriculum. By doing so, they can overcome disad-vantages that their students may have. The socio-economic indicator enables us to identify schools that are roughly similar to each other with respect to the home background of their students so that their results can be compared. Eff ective schools produce good results regardless of the family back-ground of their students.

For this edition of the Report Card, we use the Parents average education (yrs) developed for the Report Card on Albertas High Schools 7 as the socio-economic indicator. When data from the 2001 cen-sus are available, we will calculate a socio-economic indicator speciÞ cally designed for the provinces elementary schools.

Previous studies8 have shown that variations in student results from school to school cannot be ac-counted for solely by the personal and family char-acteristics of its students. Many other factorsin-cluding good teaching, counselling, and school administrationcontribute to the eff ectiveness of schools. Indicators like Parents average education (yrs) describe past relationships between a socio-economic characteristic and a measure of school eff ectiveness. It should not be inferred that these relationships will, or should, remain static. The more eff ectively schools enable all their students to succeed, the weaker will be the relationship be-tween the home characteristics of students and their academic success. Thus, this socio-economic indica-tor should not be used as an excuse for poor school performance.

9

Notes

1 Caroline Hoxby, Testing Is about Openness and Openness Works (Hoover Institution, July 30, 2001). Digital doc-ument: htt p://www-hoover.stanford.edu/pubaff airs/we/current/hoxby_0701.html (as of January 2, 2003).

2 See, for instance, Michael Rutt er et al., Fift een Thousand Hours: Secondary Schools and Their Eff ects on Children (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979); Peter Mortimore et al., School Matt ers: The Junior Years (Wells, Somerset: Open Books, 1988); and Laura Lein et al., Successful Texas Schoolwide Programs: Research Study Results (STAR Center at the Charles A. Dana Center, University of Texas at Austin). Digital docu-ment: htt p://www.starcenter.org/products/pdf/successfulreport.pdf (as of June 3, 2002).

3 See the Beacon Schools program site at htt p://www.standards.dfee.gov.uk/beaconschools/.

4 See for example, Peter Cowley and Stephen Easton, Boys, Girls, and Grades: Academic Gender Balance in British Columbias Secondary Schools, Public Policy Sources 22 (Vancouver, BC: The Fraser Institute, 1999).

5 Richard Marceau and Peter Cowley, Report Card on Quebecs Secondary Schools: 2002 Edition. Studies in Edu-cation Policy (Vancouver, BC: The Fraser Institute, 2002).

6 Richard Marceau and Peter Cowley, Report Card on Quebecs Secondary Schools: 2002 Edition: pages 1215; 2324.

7 Peter Cowley with Shahrokh Shahabi-Azad, Report Card on Albertas High Schools: 2001 Edition, Studies in Education Policy (Vancouver, BC: The Fraser Institute, 2001).

8 Cowley, Report Card on Albertas High Schools: 2001 Edition: page 14.

10

Detailed school results

How to read the tables

Use the sample table and the explanation of each line below to help you interpret the detailed re-sults for individual schools. Families choosing a school for their students should seek to conÞ rm the Report Cards Þ ndings by visiting the school and interviewing teachers, school administra-tors, and other parents. And, of course, a sound academic program should be complemented by eff ective programs in areas of school activity not measured by the Report Card.

Row A

Each of the schools in the Report Card has been assigned to a Geographic Area based on the city or town in which the school is located. Grouping schools in these Geographic Areas makes it easier to compare them. Within each Geographic Area, the schools are listed in order of their 2002 pro-vincial ranking. Where schools are tied, they are listed in order of their provincial ranking for the past Þ ve years.

Row B

The school name and its affi liationpublic, separate, private, or francophone.

Row C

The average number of years of education of the most educated parent (or lone parent in a single parent family). Higher values of this statistic are commonly thought to be associated with bett er student performance. Use this statistic to identify schools at which the students share similar family backgrounds.

Row D (left)

The percentage of the schools students in the rel-evant grades who did not write the examination due to absence; because they were excused from writing the examination by the superintendent; or whose results were withheld because, for instance, they retired during the examination due to illness or were found to have cheated. School offi cials should be able to explain the reasons for a high percentage of non-writers.

Row D (right)

The schools overall academic rank in the province for 2001-02 and for the last Þ ve years. The rankings show how the school has done academically com-pared to the other schools in the province. A high ranking over Þ ve years indicates consistently strong results at the school.

A> GEOGRAPHIC AREAB> School Name [Affiliation] Gr 6 Enrolment: 71C> Parents average education (yrs): 13.8 2001-02 Last 5 Years

% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 211 / 766 199 / 647

Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendE> Gr 3 Avg exam mark: Lang. Arts 68.3 70.7 69.5 75.4 73.4 70.2 F> Math 80.0 80.7 82.3 82.5 80.8 77.0 downG> Gr 6 Avg exam mark: Lang. Arts 69.1 67.9 67.8 65.5 65.5 67.4 H> Math 75.4 70.1 76.1 65.2 74.2 75.6 I> Gr 6 gender gap: Lang. Arts F 5.0 F 8.3 F 6.7 F 4.9 F 1.6 M 1.7 up OJ> Math M 7.5 F 5.0 M 2.1 M 1.6 M 7.4 M 2.9 K> Percentage of exams failed 10.1 11.4 7.4 8.9 9.3 3.2 L> 3-year Value added: Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D C n/aM> Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C B n/aN> Overall rating out of 10 6.6 6.7 7.1 6.8 6.8 7.1

Fraser Institute Studies in Educational Policy 11

Row E

The average mark (%) achieved by the students on the grade-3 language arts achievement test. Note that all the academic performance indicatorsex-cept the 3-year Value added indicators and the Overall rating out of 10are expressed as percent-age points.

Row F

The average mark (%) achieved by the students on the grade-3 mathematics achievement test.

Row G

The average mark (%) achieved by the students on the grade-6 language arts achievement test.

Row H

The average mark (%) achieved by the students on the grade-6 mathematics achievement test.

Rows I & J

The diff erence (in percentage points) between boys and girls in their average marks on the grade-6 language arts and mathematics achievement tests. Where the diff erence favours the girls the value is preceded by an F. Where boys are favoured, the value is preceded by an M. An E means that there is no diff erence between the girls and the boys on this measure. Smaller diff erences indicate that the school is doing a good job for all its students.

Row K

The percentage of all the grade-3 and grade-6 achievement tests in language arts and mathemat-ics writt en by students at the school that were below the acceptable standard. Note that tests that were found to be only partially complete are included in this percentage.

Rows L & M

This is an estimate of the schools contribution to its students results on the grade-6 language arts and mathematics achievement tests. Schools that have a strong positive impact on their students receive

an A for this indicator. Those that receive a B or a C may have some positive impact on their students. Schools that have litt le impact receive a D.

Row N

The Overall rating out of 10 takes into account the seven indicators described in rows E through K above to answer the question, In general, how is the school doing academically?

Column O

Up at the end of an indicator row means that the school is probably improving on that indicator.

Down means that the school is probably gett ing worse. The researchers had to be at least 90% sure that the changes were not just random before in-dicating a trend. A dash indicates that there is no signiÞ cant change. Where insuffi cient data were available, n/a appears in the column. Note that for Percentage of exams failed and the two Gender gap indi-cators, a downward trend in the data will lead to an

up in the trend column. For example, a decreasing Percentage of exams failed indicates improvement and so up is displayed.

Cell P

The number of students enrolled in grade 6 as of September 30, 2001. Indicator results for small schools tend to be more variable than do those for larger schools and caution should be used in inter-preting the results for smaller schools.

Other notesNote 1

Not all the provinces elementary schools are in-cluded in the tables or the ranking. Of all the schools in the province reporting achievement-test results, 766 are included in this Report Card. Exclud-ed are schools at which fewer than 15 students were enrolled in either grade 3 or grade 6. Also excluded are schools that did not generate a suffi ciently large set of student data to enable the calculation of an Overall rating out of 10 for the school year 2001-02.


The exclusion of a school from the Report Card should not be considered a judgement of the schools eff ectiveness.

Note 2

In accordance with its regulations regarding the pri-vacy of personal information, where school results involved less than six students, Alberta Learning provided no data.

Note 3

Where there were insuffi cient data available with which to calculate an indicator or where a school was not in operation during a speciÞ c year, n/a appears in the tables.

Note 4

You can compare a schools results with these all-schools average results.

Average values for all schools 2001-2002Parents average education (yrs.): 14.1

Non-writers (%): 6.2

Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Gr 3 Average exam mark: Lang. Arts 68.2 66.9 68.6 71.6 70.2 69.9

Math 74.1 71.1 74.2 74.8 74.3 75.1

Gr 6 Average exam mark: Lang. Arts 68.6 67.8 67.6 68.2 66.7 69

Math 69.2 69.8 70.1 68 72 72.2

Gr 6 gender gap: Lang. Arts* 5.3 5.5 6.0 5.6 5.3 4.5

Math* 5.1 5.2 5.0 4.8 5.3 5.1

Percentage of exams failed 12.1 17.3 15.1 13.0 13.5 12.3

3-year Value added: Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.0 6.1 6.1 6.0 6.0 6.0

* These results reß ect the average size of the gender gaps. In 2001-2002, at 81.9% of schools, the gender gap in English favoured female students. In Math, at 66.5% of schools, the gender gap favoured male students.

Note 5

If you have questions about the Report Card, con-tact Peter Cowley, Director of School Performance Studies at the Fraser Institute at 604-714-4556 or by e-mail at [email protected].

Acme Acme

Airdrie Airdrie

Alberta Beach St. Albert/Stony Plain

Alder Flats Wetaskiwin/Drayton Valley

Alix Stettler

Andrew Vegreville/Fort Saskatchewan

Ardmore St. Paul/Bonnyville

Ardrossan Vegreville/Fort Saskatchewan

Ashmont Athabasca/Smoky Lake

Banff Banff

Barnwell Taber/Medicine Hat

Barrhead Barrhead/Westlock

Bashaw Stettler

Bassano Brooks

Bawlf Camrose

Beaverlodge Grande Prairie

Bentley Rocky Mountain House

Black Diamond Okotoks

Blackfalds Lacombe/Ponoka

Blackie High River

Bowden Olds/Didsbury

Boyle Athabasca/Smoky Lake

Bragg Creek Cochrane/Bragg Creek

Breton Wetaskiwin/Drayton Valley

Brooks Brooks

Bruderheim Vegreville/Fort Saskatchewan

Buffalo Head Prairie High Level/Fort Vermilion

Calgary Calgary

Calling Lake Athabasca/Smoky Lake

Calmar Leduc

Camrose Camrose

Carbon Drumheller/Three Hills

Cardston Lethbridge

Caroline Rocky Mountain House

Carseland Strathmore

Carstairs Acme

Cayley High River

Clive Lacombe/Ponoka

Clyde Barrhead/Westlock

Coaldale Lethbridge

Coalhurst Lethbridge

Cochrane Cochrane/Bragg Creek

Cold Lake St. Paul/Bonnyville

Condor Rocky Mountain House

Consort Stettler

List of cities and geographic areas

City Geographic area


Coronation Stettler

Cremona Olds/Didsbury

Crooked Creek Grande Prairie

Dapp Barrhead/Westlock

Darwell St. Albert/Stony Plain

Daysland Camrose

Delburne Stettler

Drayton Valley Wetaskiwin/Drayton Valley

Drumheller Drumheller/Three Hills

Duchess Brooks

Duffield St. Albert/Stony Plain

Eckville Rocky Mountain House

Edmonton Edmonton

Edson Edson/Whitecourt

Elk Point St. Paul/Bonnyville

Enchant Taber/Medicine Hat

Erskine Stettler

Evansburg St. Albert/Stony Plain

Exshaw Banff

Fairview Peace River

Falher Peace River

Falun Wetaskiwin/Drayton Valley

Fawcett Barrhead/Westlock

Foremost Taber/Medicine Hat

Forestburg Stettler

Fort Chipewyan Fort McMurray

Fort McMurray Fort McMurray

Fort Saskatchewan Vegreville/Fort Saskatchewan

Fox Creek Edson/Whitecourt

Gift Lake Peace River

Gleichen Strathmore

Glendon St. Paul/Bonnyville

Grande Prairie Grande Prairie

Grimshaw Peace River

Gunn St. Albert/Stony Plain

Hardisty Wainwright/Vermilion

Hay Lakes Camrose

High Prairie Grande Prairie

High River High River

Hinton Jasper/Hinton

Holden Camrose

Hythe Grande Prairie

Innisfail Olds/Didsbury

Irma Wainwright/Vermilion

Irvine Taber/Medicine Hat

Jasper Jasper/Hinton

Kathyrn Airdrie

Kikino Athabasca/Smoky Lake

Kinuso Athabasca/Smoky Lake

Kitscoty Wainwright/Vermilion

La Crete High Level/Fort Vermilion

Lacombe Lacombe/Ponoka

Lamont Vegreville/Fort Saskatchewan

Lancaster Park St. Albert/Stony Plain

Leduc Leduc

Legal Barrhead/Westlock

Leslieville Rocky Mountain House

Lethbridge Lethbridge

Lundbreck Fort MacLeod

Magrath Lethbridge

Mallaig St. Paul/Bonnyville

Manning High Level/Fort Vermilion

Mannville Wainwright/Vermilion

Marwayne Wainwright/Vermilion

Mayerthorpe Edson/Whitecourt

Medicine Hat Taber/Medicine Hat

Millarville Okotoks

Monarch Picture Butte

Morrin Drumheller/Three Hills

Namao Barrhead/Westlock

Nanton High River

Neerlandia Barrhead/Westlock

New Norway Camrose

New Sarepta Sherwood Park

Nobleford Picture Butte

Okotoks Okotoks

Olds Olds/Didsbury

Onoway St. Albert/Stony Plain

Peace River Peace River

Picture Butte Picture Butte

Pincher Creek Fort MacLeod

Plamondon Athabasca/Smoky Lake

Ponoka Lacombe/Ponoka

Provost Wainwright/Vermilion

Rainbow Lake High Level/Fort Vermilion

Ralston Taber/Medicine Hat

Red Deer Red Deer

Rimbey Lacombe/Ponoka

Riviere Qui Barre Barrhead/Westlock

Rocky Mountain House Rocky Mountain House

List of cities and geographic areas, continued





Rosemary Brooks

Rycroft Peace River

Sangudo Edson/Whitecourt

Seba Beach St. Albert/Stony Plain

Sedgewick Wainwright/Vermilion

Seven Persons Taber/Medicine Hat

Sexsmith Grande Prairie

Sherwood Park Sherwood Park

Slave Lake Athabasca/Smoky Lake

Smoky Lake Athabasca/Smoky Lake

Spirit River Grande Prairie

Spruce Grove St. Albert/Stony Plain

Spruce View Olds/Didsbury

St. Albert St. Albert/Stony Plain

St. Paul St. Paul/Bonnyville

Stirling Lethbridge

Stony Plain St. Albert/Stony Plain

Strathmore Strathmore

Sundre Olds/Didsbury

Swan Hills Edson/Whitecourt

Sylvan Lake Rocky Mountain House

Thorsby Leduc

Three Hills Drumheller/Three Hills

Tomahawk Wetaskiwin/Drayton Valley

Turner Valley Okotoks

Two Hills Vegreville/Fort Saskatchewan

Valleyview Grande Prairie

Vauxhall Taber/Medicine Hat

Vegreville Vegreville/Fort Saskatchewan

Vermilion Wainwright/Vermilion

Viking Wainwright/Vermilion

Vilna Athabasca/Smoky Lake

Vulcan High River

Wainwright Wainwright/Vermilion

Warburg Wetaskiwin/Drayton Valley

Wembley Grande Prairie

Westlock Barrhead/Westlock

Wetaskiwin Wetaskiwin/Drayton Valley

Acme 15

Airdrie 15

Athabasca/Smoky Lake 15

Banff 16

Barrhead/Westlock 16

Brooks 17

Calgary 18

Camrose 39

Cochrane/Bragg Creek 40

Drumheller/Three Hills 41

Edmonton 41

Edson/Whitecourt 62

Fort MacLeod 62

Fort McMurray 63

Grande Prairie 64

High Level/Fort Vermilion 67

High River 67

Jasper/Hinton 68

Lacombe/Ponoka 68

Leduc 69

Lethbridge 70

Okotoks 72

Olds/Didsbury 73

Peace River 74

Picture Butte 75

Red Deer 75

Rocky Mountain House 76

Sherwood Park 77

St. Albert/Stony Plain 79

St. Paul/Bonnyville 82

Stettler 83

Strathmore 84

Taber/Medicine Hat 84

Vegreville/Fort Saskatchewan 87

Wainwright/Vermilion 88

Wetaskiwin/Drayton Valley 90



Index of geographic areas

Geographic area Page


ACME AREAACME School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 26Parents average education (yrs): 13.5 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 3.0 Rank: 383 / 766 250 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.6 72.3 74.2 73.0 72.9 67.0 down Math 87.5 76.0 79.6 75.3 79.1 74.4 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 70.8 67.6 69.1 68.1 66.7 69.1 Math 71.5 72.3 74.2 70.2 72.6 73.4 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts M 9.5 F 7.4 M 0.3 F 4.7 F 7.0 F 3.7 Math M 14.7 F 5.4 M 4.9 F 5.2 F 9.4 M 2.9 Percentage of exams failed 5.3 14.5 9.6 11.8 5.1 10.3 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a C C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.7 6.5 7.3 6.3 6.6 6.2

Hugh Sutherland School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 55Parents average education (yrs): 14.4 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.7 Rank: 470 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 70.1 n/a 68.3 67.2 67.0 65.2 n/a Math 74.8 n/a 76.5 66.9 64.7 67.6 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 69.3 n/a 67.4 70.8 69.4 68.3 n/a Math 71.3 n/a 74.8 69.3 83.2 80.4 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 1.8 n/a F 6.3 F 8.9 M 1.0 F 5.4 n/a Math M 8.7 n/a M 2.6 F 6.7 M 4.7 F 1.0 n/aPercentage of exams failed 5.4 n/a 9.6 11.4 14.4 13.7 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a A n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.8 n/a 6.7 5.4 6.2 5.7 n/a

AIRDRIE AREAAirdrie Koinonia Christian School [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 27Parents average education (yrs): 14.2 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 6.7 Rank: 163 / 766 30 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 82.1 81.9 83.5 79.6 80.0 75.3 down Math 80.8 74.2 84.7 75.5 82.5 79.8 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 67.3 80.4 74.0 81.3 76.4 75.8 Math 63.3 87.4 71.9 63.6 76.4 76.3 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 2.1 n/a n/a F 4.9 n/a F 9.2 n/a Math M 5.5 n/a n/a M 1.2 n/a M 1.7 n/aPercentage of exams failed 7.7 4.4 6.9 7.7 2.4 3.6 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B C n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.2 9.4 8.3 7.5 8.6 7.4

Ralph McCall School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 56Parents average education (yrs): 14.5 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 3.7 Rank: 322 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a 70.0 69.4 69.4 69.4 n/a Math n/a n/a 81.7 74.4 76.8 80.3 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a 69.0 69.9 63.4 69.3 n/a Math n/a n/a 67.1 63.3 65.1 67.6 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a n/a F 2.5 F 13.2 F 8.7 F 4.2 n/a Math n/a n/a M 0.9 F 5.5 F 3.0 M 1.4 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a n/a 11.9 11.4 14.7 9.6 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a D n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a n/a 6.9 5.4 5.5 6.5 n/a

Our Lady Queen of Peace Elementary School [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 97Parents average education (yrs): 14.3 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.5 Rank: 501 / 766 293 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 69.0 65.6 69.1 72.1 71.1 67.5 Math 71.6 68.7 73.7 78.0 78.3 75.8 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 67.3 70.3 67.2 67.1 66.2 70.3 Math 63.5 76.8 72.3 67.4 75.8 67.8 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 3.2 F 3.5 F 2.5 F 2.5 F 5.6 F 7.9 down Math M 3.0 M 3.2 M 9.0 M 6.8 F 0.3 M 2.2 Percentage of exams failed 9.5 14.6 8.6 9.2 7.9 15.4 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a C B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A D n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.1 6.7 6.5 6.4 6.9 5.5

Kathyrn School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 49Parents average education (yrs): 13.9 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.4 Rank: 621 / 766 528 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 63.3 66.8 66.2 69.8 71.3 68.9 Math 70.0 70.2 77.4 65.4 76.2 71.4 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 72.6 63.9 57.9 63.7 56.5 63.4 Math 71.1 61.3 54.1 64.3 56.1 63.1 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 4.0 F 6.5 F 4.5 F 3.9 F 10.7 F 8.1 Math F 9.9 F 2.7 M 4.1 F 4.2 M 2.0 F 1.5 Percentage of exams failed 8.2 22.4 32.3 15.8 29.0 21.8 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D D n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a D D n/aOverall rating out of 10 5.9 5.2 4.2 5.1 4.0 4.5

ATHABASCA/SMOKY LAKE AREABoyle School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 23Parents average education (yrs): 13.3 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 13.2 Rank: 146 / 766 166 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 71.0 70.8 70.6 72.2 70.8 70.8 down Math 77.7 82.2 74.8 73.4 78.9 84.5 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 71.7 73.1 73.3 72.8 70.6 74.0 Math 73.0 79.8 72.7 68.4 76.9 71.7 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 3.4 F 6.0 F 2.7 F 2.0 F 8.9 F 7.6 Math M 0.6 M 3.6 M 8.1 F 3.2 F 12.0 M 0.2 Percentage of exams failed 5.6 7.1 7.4 9.8 5.9 2.2 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.5 7.9 7.0 6.7 6.5 7.5

H. A. Kostash School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 34Parents average education (yrs): 13.5 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.8 Rank: 163 / 766 315 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.7 71.6 76.6 76.1 67.2 72.2 Math 78.1 69.5 82.6 75.7 71.5 78.1 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 69.9 64.5 58.3 67.5 69.5 71.7 Math 66.4 55.8 64.1 69.9 71.3 76.5 upGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 6.4 F 8.0 F 6.2 M 3.2 F 7.1 F 6.4 Math M 1.8 M 1.8 M 2.3 M 11.7 M 0.1 M 0.6 Percentage of exams failed 5.1 23.1 15.9 9.3 5.2 2.8 up3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.1 5.2 6.2 6.3 6.6 7.4 up

Ecole Plamondon School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 34Parents average education (yrs): 13.0 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 484 / 766 403 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 61.2 60.0 66.8 70.4 68.0 66.4 Math 70.2 66.4 74.0 72.2 70.1 70.6 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 64.2 71.2 70.6 67.1 63.5 64.8 down Math 62.6 68.8 71.6 62.2 71.1 67.9 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts M 3.2 F 3.0 M 0.1 M 2.1 F 0.6 M 0.4 Math n/a M 8.7 M 10.9 M 17.6 M 2.7 M 6.8 Percentage of exams failed 20.5 15.2 9.3 10.5 8.8 11.0 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B C n/aOverall rating out of 10 3.7 5.8 6.4 5.2 6.2 5.6

E G Wahlstrom School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 121Parents average education (yrs): 14.0 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 7.5 Rank: 670 / 766 538 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 65.3 62.8 64.7 65.4 66.1 63.4 Math 67.9 70.1 67.2 67.1 64.0 65.0 downGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 66.0 65.1 63.4 60.9 61.0 65.7 Math 62.4 63.0 63.7 56.1 62.5 59.8 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 4.3 F 0.9 F 1.6 F 8.5 F 5.3 F 4.3 Math M 5.3 M 5.3 M 4.3 F 3.4 F 0.8 M 4.3 Percentage of exams failed 18.2 19.9 24.8 25.3 24.7 22.3 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a D D n/aOverall rating out of 10 4.9 5.5 4.9 3.6 4.3 4.0


Vilna School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 24Parents average education (yrs): 13.6 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 3.8 Rank: 706 / 766 597 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 55.8 50.5 67.1 73.2 63.3 62.6 Math 58.8 45.2 62.5 66.9 68.0 73.3 upGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 65.9 66.1 61.4 59.8 59.5 59.7 down Math 62.5 65.7 67.0 56.8 63.0 60.3 downGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 9.4 F 9.2 M 1.8 F 7.5 F 11.1 F 13.1 Math F 6.2 F 6.1 M 2.0 F 10.9 F 2.3 F 5.4 Percentage of exams failed 22.0 41.8 16.7 21.3 28.7 24.0 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B D n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B D n/aOverall rating out of 10 3.4 2.4 5.5 3.9 3.6 3.2

Kinuso School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 26Parents average education (yrs): 12.4 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 3.9 Rank: 706 / 766 615 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 72.8 74.0 73.4 70.7 69.6 67.1 down Math 86.5 84.8 83.7 74.0 82.4 75.1 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 58.9 54.6 52.9 44.1 50.8 56.8 Math 56.8 54.9 46.1 38.8 54.1 46.6 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 2.8 F 14.2 F 11.3 n/a F 22.8 F 5.8 n/a Math F 4.0 F 3.5 F 12.2 n/a F 18.4 M 5.6 n/aPercentage of exams failed 18.4 25.3 25.6 37.5 20.0 27.6 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D D n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a D D n/aOverall rating out of 10 5.6 4.6 3.9 1.1 2.9 3.2

Kikino Elementary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 16Parents average education (yrs): 13.3 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 5.0 Rank: 749 / 766 645 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 51.2 50.8 60.8 56.0 51.4 53.1 Math 50.0 48.3 72.0 49.4 42.6 65.9 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 56.7 60.5 54.1 46.7 56.8 58.5 Math 54.0 59.2 48.1 43.8 50.4 48.3 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts M 3.4 F 12.7 F 11.6 n/a F 9.5 F 3.2 n/a Math M 7.4 F 10.2 F 0.3 n/a M 2.1 M 0.8 n/aPercentage of exams failed 41.5 50.0 38.1 58.8 54.1 40.4 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a C D n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a D D n/aOverall rating out of 10 0.7 1.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 1.7

Ashmont Elementary Community School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 62Parents average education (yrs): 13.0 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 4.8 Rank: 757 / 766 640 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 62.4 58.0 59.3 59.5 59.8 58.2 Math 61.1 53.6 58.8 53.3 58.0 62.6 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 54.8 55.1 53.2 56.1 51.1 54.1 Math 49.3 48.4 52.4 50.8 41.2 45.6 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 13.9 F 9.7 F 5.7 F 8.5 F 6.2 M 0.9 Math F 5.2 M 5.1 F 1.3 F 4.1 F 0.9 M 12.8 Percentage of exams failed 32.6 44.9 44.2 40.8 47.4 44.5 down3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D D n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a D D n/aOverall rating out of 10 1.7 1.7 2.3 1.2 1.1 0.8 down

St. Mary of the Lake [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 37Parents average education (yrs): 13.7 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 14.1 Rank: 761 / 766 640 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 61.4 56.1 58.5 58.8 49.1 55.0 Math 63.2 49.2 57.2 60.1 48.9 46.9 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 58.2 62.2 62.8 59.5 61.9 57.0 Math 52.2 61.3 57.2 55.6 61.6 51.9 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a M 7.4 F 0.5 F 17.8 F 9.8 F 12.6 Math n/a M 6.9 M 10.8 F 10.4 M 4.7 F 18.6 Percentage of exams failed 32.8 46.8 41.5 39.7 42.7 47.3 down3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B D n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C D n/aOverall rating out of 10 1.5 2.2 2.7 0.9 1.2 0.0 down

Calling Lake School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 23Parents average education (yrs): 12.1 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 33.3 Rank: 761 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 56.7 60.2 57.5 n/a 55.4 n/a Math n/a 48.7 65.9 54.2 n/a 66.6 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 44.0 37.7 44.8 n/a 43.5 n/a Math n/a 41.0 32.6 34.1 n/a 46.3 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a F 1.4 F 11.6 F 0.9 n/a F 5.7 n/a Math n/a M 1.8 F 0.6 M 8.4 n/a n/a n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a 59.7 50.0 68.5 n/a 50.0 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a D n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a D n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a 0.5 0.7 0.0 n/a 0.0 n/a

BANFF AREABanff Elementary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 41Parents average education (yrs): 14.4 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 68.5 Rank: 343 / 766 315 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 68.3 68.2 67.4 73.0 61.7 65.8 Math 73.5 69.3 72.1 79.1 64.6 72.6 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 71.4 72.9 71.6 67.3 66.6 70.4 Math 71.5 75.3 72.6 69.3 68.6 72.1 downGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 7.5 F 2.2 F 8.8 F 9.9 F 6.7 F 0.1 Math M 3.8 M 2.7 F 1.7 M 0.2 M 1.7 F 2.0 Percentage of exams failed 12.3 11.2 12.5 10.9 16.8 10.3 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a C B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C C n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.2 7.2 6.3 6.4 5.0 6.4

Exshaw School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 27Parents average education (yrs): 14.1 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 24.5 Rank: 757 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 56.5 n/a 71.1 59.9 58.9 n/a Math n/a 52.3 n/a 69.2 69.1 53.8 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 62.4 n/a 58.2 56.4 54.9 n/a Math n/a 59.8 n/a 54.2 56.1 50.8 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a F 12.1 n/a M 4.3 F 2.8 M 3.1 n/a Math n/a F 18.9 n/a M 5.6 M 4.3 F 1.9 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a 49.4 n/a 31.8 41.1 47.9 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D n/a n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a D n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a 1.2 n/a 3.6 2.7 0.8 n/a

BARRHEAD/WESTLOCK AREA Namao School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 50Parents average education (yrs): 13.8 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.2 Rank: 43 / 766 30 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 74.3 75.1 77.8 77.9 77.2 79.1 Math 78.8 80.0 83.9 80.4 82.8 88.9 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 72.5 74.2 74.5 77.2 70.8 73.5 Math 71.6 75.5 77.8 77.3 77.3 80.1 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts M 2.2 F 3.2 F 2.9 F 4.4 F 9.2 F 5.5 Math M 10.7 F 0.1 M 1.6 F 3.8 F 4.0 M 1.4 Percentage of exams failed 7.2 5.4 3.0 4.4 4.1 1.8 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B A n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.0 8.4 8.5 8.0 7.5 8.4

Dapp School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 17Parents average education (yrs): 12.2 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 99 / 766 142 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 68.7 66.7 74.5 72.8 70.2 78.8 Math 74.2 64.2 81.9 75.6 76.6 87.3 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 71.5 69.4 74.6 73.3 64.2 73.1 Math 74.5 74.6 84.3 76.8 69.6 75.7 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 8.8 F 0.9 M 4.0 n/a F 12.9 M 5.5 n/a Math F 6.1 F 0.8 M 3.7 n/a F 10.0 M 6.1 n/aPercentage of exams failed 7.8 12.2 1.4 2.2 13.7 3.9 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.5 6.9 8.4 7.9 5.2 7.8


W R Frose School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 17Parents average education (yrs): 14.5 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 5.1 Rank: 116 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a 82.3 n/a 81.9 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a 84.5 n/a 80.2 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a 72.1 n/a 71.4 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a 70.4 n/a 79.1 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a M 3.2 n/a F 6.6 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a M 11.4 n/a F 3.7 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a n/a n/a 4.2 n/a 4.1 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a n/a n/a 7.6 n/a 7.7 n/a

Camilla School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 66Parents average education (yrs): 13.3 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 248 / 766 270 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 70.9 75.0 76.7 78.2 76.2 76.7 Math 72.0 78.3 79.4 78.3 75.5 76.0 downGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 68.6 62.5 64.5 69.0 64.0 71.4 up Math 69.5 62.4 68.1 68.1 70.2 73.0 upGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts E F 4.1 F 3.7 F 8.3 F 5.5 F 8.8 down Math M 7.5 M 8.1 M 6.7 F 0.7 F 5.6 F 1.0 Percentage of exams failed 11.4 14.4 15.0 8.3 12.6 6.0 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C B n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.3 6.2 6.5 6.9 6.2 6.9

St. Mary School [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 21Parents average education (yrs): 13.0 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.9 Rank: 363 / 766 367 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 69.1 66.4 70.9 73.6 70.4 78.2 Math 70.8 62.1 69.6 73.7 68.4 76.9 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 63.6 62.8 68.4 67.1 70.3 70.9 up Math 66.2 63.6 71.6 65.5 76.9 79.7 upGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 7.2 F 7.5 F 14.5 F 0.1 F 1.4 M 9.5 Math F 9.4 F 0.6 F 8.4 M 5.9 F 1.1 M 16.0 Percentage of exams failed 16.1 22.5 14.0 12.3 10.1 5.8 up3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 4.9 5.0 5.5 6.2 6.8 6.3 up

Legal School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 30Parents average education (yrs): 13.2 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 363 / 766 403 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 66.4 70.1 72.1 67.4 67.3 74.8 Math 67.9 78.1 76.1 71.2 67.7 73.5 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 65.3 70.7 64.1 64.7 64.0 67.4 Math 64.4 62.1 72.3 65.9 70.0 69.0 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 8.1 F 12.4 F 7.6 F 3.3 F 5.6 F 2.4 up Math F 0.5 F 4.8 F 3.7 F 0.7 F 12.6 M 2.3 Percentage of exams failed 15.0 18.3 10.8 17.9 14.4 12.8 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C C n/aOverall rating out of 10 5.2 5.8 6.4 5.5 5.0 6.3

Westlock Elementary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 70Parents average education (yrs): 13.1 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.8 Rank: 363 / 766 425 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 66.1 64.7 67.6 69.5 70.7 71.0 up Math 69.3 69.1 73.5 70.6 72.7 75.6 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 63.7 65.4 72.1 67.8 66.2 69.0 Math 63.3 63.9 71.8 65.5 65.4 71.1 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 9.3 F 6.9 F 4.5 F 11.4 F 4.7 F 3.5 Math F 6.9 M 6.7 M 5.3 M 3.4 F 0.5 M 6.5 Percentage of exams failed 17.8 23.3 12.6 16.1 19.7 8.0 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C B n/aOverall rating out of 10 4.5 4.9 6.4 5.1 5.6 6.3

Eleanor Hall School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 16Parents average education (yrs): 11.7 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 3.0 Rank: 363 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 65.7 n/a 72.7 72.1 75.6 n/a Math n/a 69.7 n/a 76.3 70.5 79.2 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 72.3 n/a 70.4 63.0 63.4 n/a Math n/a 73.8 n/a 67.9 71.4 75.8 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a F 0.6 n/a F 8.2 F 0.7 F 0.4 n/a Math n/a M 1.5 n/a F 1.5 M 7.0 M 7.6 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a 10.6 n/a 1.3 12.0 14.1 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B n/a n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a 7.2 n/a 7.1 6.0 6.3 n/a

Barrhead Elementary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 102Parents average education (yrs): 13.3 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.3 Rank: 443 / 766 437 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 70.3 67.5 68.2 73.9 70.5 70.0 Math 72.6 69.5 67.6 73.1 69.6 78.7 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 69.3 65.8 64.1 64.3 65.9 65.8 Math 65.2 64.4 63.6 62.9 69.0 64.6 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 2.5 F 7.9 F 10.7 F 5.5 F 3.7 F 3.7 Math M 2.2 F 4.9 F 3.8 F 4.8 F 0.8 M 0.4 upPercentage of exams failed 10.7 15.8 18.6 11.6 14.7 14.0 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C C n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.3 5.6 5.0 5.8 5.9 5.9

Neerlandia Public Christian School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 27Parents average education (yrs): 14.3 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 501 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 67.6 n/a n/a 72.6 80.5 74.3 n/a Math 69.0 n/a n/a 76.7 80.3 82.4 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 69.3 n/a n/a 67.2 69.9 67.6 n/a Math 72.3 n/a n/a 65.2 80.6 72.6 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 10.5 n/a n/a F 15.5 F 8.1 F 14.2 n/a Math F 5.5 n/a n/a F 9.2 M 0.1 F 14.3 n/aPercentage of exams failed 7.7 n/a n/a 13.6 4.2 9.1 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 5.9 n/a n/a 5.1 7.9 5.5 n/a

BROOKS AREARosemary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 16Parents average education (yrs): 13.8 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 5.6 Rank: 129 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 72.3 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 77.6 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 75.6 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 84.7 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a M 0.2 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a M 11.1 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 3.5 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 7.6 n/a

Holy Family Academy [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 44Parents average education (yrs): 13.6 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.9 Rank: 163 / 766 13 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 79.7 81.2 83.2 79.7 76.0 down Math n/a 86.8 84.1 85.7 85.4 84.1 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 78.6 74.6 79.6 76.3 75.1 Math n/a 79.5 76.5 81.5 80.0 75.9 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a F 3.2 F 8.7 F 7.6 F 4.0 F 9.3 Math n/a M 1.5 E F 1.0 F 2.4 F 5.4 Percentage of exams failed n/a 3.9 5.9 0.0 1.7 3.8 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a 9.2 8.2 9.1 8.6 7.4


Eastbrook Elementary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 49Parents average education (yrs): 13.7 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 4.7 Rank: 175 / 766 142 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 72.2 69.2 67.2 75.7 74.6 73.1 Math 71.3 65.7 69.2 77.8 78.1 80.0 upGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 70.8 71.4 73.3 68.9 71.4 70.1 Math 71.6 74.1 78.2 73.1 78.0 76.5 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 1.3 F 2.2 F 0.5 F 7.4 F 5.3 F 2.4 Math F 1.3 M 2.3 M 4.4 F 1.5 M 3.3 M 0.7 Percentage of exams failed 8.3 12.5 8.8 6.7 5.7 7.1 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.4 7.3 up

Central Elementary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 56Parents average education (yrs): 13.7 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 17.2 Rank: 266 / 766 186 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 75.6 73.3 72.6 76.9 75.6 67.1 Math 77.4 79.4 80.4 80.7 72.5 74.5 downGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.4 72.0 72.1 68.6 65.3 72.3 Math 75.0 75.3 76.7 70.5 72.3 82.3 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a F 7.1 F 5.6 F 5.5 F 2.2 F 6.5 Math n/a F 4.5 M 1.2 M 7.4 M 6.8 M 1.3 Percentage of exams failed 5.8 5.2 7.6 10.3 12.5 6.7 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C A n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.8 7.7 7.5 6.7 6.3 6.8

Griffin Park School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 47Parents average education (yrs): 13.7 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 3.8 Rank: 484 / 766 339 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 71.0 63.6 73.8 69.6 74.0 66.7 Math 73.6 65.7 76.6 69.7 68.2 67.7 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 70.9 69.1 71.1 69.2 69.1 70.7 Math 70.2 70.3 75.4 71.3 75.1 71.8 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 12.7 F 11.9 M 1.2 F 3.0 M 3.3 F 4.2 Math F 7.7 F 7.2 M 6.8 M 5.5 M 4.3 M 2.8 upPercentage of exams failed 3.7 21.3 8.0 8.7 7.5 15.3 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A C n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.3 5.0 7.3 6.3 6.7 5.6

Duchess School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 26Parents average education (yrs): 12.8 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.7 Rank: 562 / 766 367 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 71.6 66.7 75.6 70.8 71.7 64.3 Math 72.7 72.2 81.2 75.3 70.7 61.2 downGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.3 69.9 69.0 72.1 67.1 71.1 Math 68.9 66.9 65.4 68.7 68.8 73.8 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 1.0 F 5.0 F 0.6 F 1.1 F 11.7 F 1.1 Math M 6.3 M 8.9 M 17.5 M 5.4 M 4.1 M 3.6 Percentage of exams failed 7.9 15.9 9.3 6.8 11.1 19.5 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.8 6.0 6.5 6.9 5.7 5.1

Bassano School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 38Parents average education (yrs): 13.4 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 8.1 Rank: 684 / 766 573 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 71.5 68.2 66.3 72.5 62.9 63.3 down Math 71.6 58.0 72.9 79.6 69.3 63.5 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 65.2 66.8 59.1 65.2 62.4 63.1 Math 59.6 62.1 54.9 54.3 61.4 65.2 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 8.9 F 4.8 M 7.6 F 7.9 M 7.4 M 2.0 Math M 2.6 M 9.7 M 18.3 F 12.0 M 6.9 M 4.1 Percentage of exams failed 14.0 26.0 28.1 17.0 27.3 27.9 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D D n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C D n/aOverall rating out of 10 5.4 4.6 3.4 4.8 3.8 3.7

CALGARYWebber Academy [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 36Parents average education (yrs): 16.0 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.5 Rank: 1 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a 83.2 90.3 87.5 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a 90.3 92.8 89.9 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a 82.9 81.0 83.8 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a 83.9 89.6 90.4 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a M 2.8 F 9.2 F 3.1 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a M 4.5 F 3.3 M 2.9 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a n/a n/a 0.0 0.0 0.0 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a n/a n/a 9.5 9.7 10.0 n/a

Clear Water Academy [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 18Parents average education (yrs): 15.5 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.3 Rank: 1 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 83.3 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 91.5 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 88.0 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 93.8 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a F 6.6 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a F 0.5 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.0 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 10.0 n/a

St. Vincent De Paul Elementary Junior High School [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 32Parents average education (yrs): 16.2 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 15.4 Rank: 4 / 766 4 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 85.1 81.4 78.8 86.3 85.7 84.8 Math 91.5 91.6 93.5 90.2 92.2 92.7 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 77.5 79.2 77.7 79.1 76.3 82.7 Math 79.9 85.3 80.6 75.9 84.9 91.6 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 3.7 F 3.6 F 0.1 F 13.4 F 4.1 F 2.5 Math M 3.2 F 3.4 M 6.0 F 10.4 F 2.9 M 2.9 Percentage of exams failed 0.8 1.7 1.6 0.9 2.7 1.1 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a C A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C A n/aOverall rating out of 10 9.5 9.7 9.1 8.2 9.2 9.9

Calgary Jewish Academy [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 31Parents average education (yrs): 16.0 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 5 / 766 2 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 77.8 78.2 79.1 83.4 85.6 82.6 Math 84.2 88.5 85.6 89.1 91.5 90.2 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 82.7 78.0 81.6 83.7 83.8 83.0 up Math 82.9 83.5 87.0 84.7 88.4 86.6 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 4.2 F 3.4 F 8.9 F 7.4 F 2.6 F 2.9 Math M 2.5 F 1.3 F 3.4 M 1.2 M 4.2 M 0.6 Percentage of exams failed 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 9.1 9.5 8.9 9.5 9.8 9.7

Elbow Park Elementary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 29Parents average education (yrs): 17.4 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 6 / 766 5 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 72.9 76.7 75.2 82.3 78.8 81.6 Math 81.8 89.4 87.0 86.6 89.4 88.2 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 78.7 79.2 82.0 73.5 85.3 83.6 Math 77.2 85.4 79.0 76.1 92.6 89.1 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 5.1 F 6.5 F 5.5 F 4.6 M 0.7 F 3.0 Math M 1.3 M 8.8 M 6.2 M 0.8 M 3.5 M 3.7 Percentage of exams failed 2.9 2.9 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.0 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.3 8.8 8.5 8.7 9.8 9.5


Nellie McClung School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 65Parents average education (yrs): 16.1 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.3 Rank: 6 / 766 56 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 72.3 68.8 73.5 74.5 69.6 77.1 Math 83.7 71.7 81.5 72.7 74.8 86.6 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.1 70.3 76.4 82.0 81.9 85.2 up Math 78.2 75.2 82.4 82.4 88.9 88.2 upGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts M 0.5 F 7.6 F 9.3 F 8.1 F 1.5 F 3.2 Math F 0.3 F 5.2 F 10.9 M 3.6 M 1.9 F 0.6 Percentage of exams failed 2.7 8.0 7.6 3.4 4.3 0.0 up3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.5 6.9 7.2 7.8 8.3 9.5 up

Calgary Montessori School [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 31Parents average education (yrs): 15.9 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.1 Rank: 8 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 78.9 78.9 86.4 89.1 79.1 Math n/a 85.4 91.6 88.1 89.4 85.7 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a 84.2 86.3 77.9 79.2 n/a Math n/a n/a 92.2 89.5 90.3 93.0 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a n/a F 14.6 n/a F 1.2 M 2.3 n/a Math n/a n/a F 8.3 n/a F 2.6 M 0.8 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a n/a 8.8 10.0 9.9 9.3 n/a

Hillhurst Community School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 65Parents average education (yrs): 15.3 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 6.0 Rank: 13 / 766 10 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.3 64.9 77.7 78.7 75.3 82.1 Math 85.0 70.4 81.7 87.0 84.9 86.7 upGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 79.8 80.5 80.9 84.0 79.1 81.1 Math 83.9 85.7 86.4 84.0 87.4 88.2 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 1.1 M 0.8 F 7.8 F 2.8 F 3.2 M 1.2 Math M 8.1 M 2.4 F 1.3 M 3.8 M 6.6 M 10.3 downPercentage of exams failed 2.1 7.9 0.7 2.4 1.9 1.2 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.7 8.1 8.8 9.2 8.6 9.0

Monsignor E. L. Doyle Elementary School [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 120Parents average education (yrs): 15.7 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.2 Rank: 15 / 766 10 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 76.6 74.9 76.2 78.6 74.5 79.0 Math 85.6 81.4 86.7 82.6 79.6 85.8 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 77.4 76.5 78.4 79.2 73.7 78.4 Math 81.3 81.2 85.7 82.8 83.0 85.1 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 8.0 F 2.7 F 4.8 F 5.6 F 1.1 F 3.2 Math F 1.9 M 2.4 M 1.6 M 1.7 M 4.1 M 1.7 Percentage of exams failed 1.3 3.3 0.7 1.3 2.9 0.9 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a C A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.6 8.8 8.9 8.7 8.1 8.9

Father James Whelihan [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 69Parents average education (yrs): 15.0 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 5.7 Rank: 15 / 766 19 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 75.3 74.2 78.4 80.6 79.8 79.6 Math 83.2 81.1 90.8 86.1 87.1 87.1 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.4 69.4 74.7 71.6 69.3 75.3 Math 81.6 80.6 77.9 79.2 82.0 85.0 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 1.9 F 6.6 F 4.9 F 8.7 F 1.0 F 1.6 Math M 1.1 M 0.7 F 4.1 F 0.2 M 3.3 M 2.0 Percentage of exams failed 3.2 6.9 2.9 2.6 3.5 1.2 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.5 8.0 8.5 8.3 8.4 8.9 up

Calgary Waldorf School [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 23Parents average education (yrs): 15.8 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.0 Rank: 15 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 75.5 n/a 80.2 76.0 76.2 81.0 n/a Math 85.5 n/a 88.4 81.3 77.9 84.5 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 82.1 n/a 81.7 79.5 72.7 80.1 n/a Math 79.6 n/a 69.7 81.2 76.2 84.2 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 7.3 n/a F 13.4 F 9.0 F 6.6 F 2.2 n/a Math F 0.9 n/a M 1.0 F 4.8 F 7.6 M 5.2 n/aPercentage of exams failed 2.4 n/a 5.8 2.2 2.2 1.0 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a B n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.8 n/a 8.0 8.0 7.4 8.9 n/a

Calgary French School (The) [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 37Parents average education (yrs): 16.2 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.0 Rank: 19 / 766 8 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 80.0 76.4 79.2 79.2 75.7 80.5 Math 87.0 84.0 88.5 81.8 77.5 85.9 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 77.2 75.6 76.9 79.6 78.1 82.3 up Math 84.2 81.5 82.3 87.9 85.1 83.8 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 7.3 F 2.3 F 7.1 M 0.3 F 6.6 F 0.7 Math F 6.3 M 7.5 F 1.8 M 0.4 M 0.4 M 6.0 Percentage of exams failed 0.5 1.2 0.5 0.0 3.0 1.0 down3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B D n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.8 8.6 8.8 9.4 8.3 8.8

St. Boniface Elementary School [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 44Parents average education (yrs): 15.6 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 6.9 Rank: 19 / 766 13 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 74.1 69.4 74.5 82.3 78.6 81.7 up Math 79.2 81.9 83.2 88.3 83.0 84.3 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 80.0 76.6 75.6 74.9 73.4 77.2 Math 81.4 80.6 83.1 76.8 86.3 85.3 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a F 0.3 M 1.6 F 0.8 F 6.9 F 4.0 down Math n/a M 5.3 M 4.7 M 5.6 F 0.2 M 2.6 Percentage of exams failed 2.1 8.8 3.3 1.3 1.2 1.9 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.8 8.2 8.4 8.8 8.5 8.8 up

Alex Ferguson School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 27Parents average education (yrs): 14.8 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 5.0 Rank: 19 / 766 24 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.4 68.6 69.6 77.2 80.0 86.3 up Math 74.8 72.4 85.0 76.7 87.1 91.2 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 79.8 81.0 72.7 80.2 72.1 73.1 Math 79.4 81.4 80.3 85.8 88.4 69.9 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 3.5 F 1.1 F 4.6 F 3.4 F 11.5 M 1.1 Math M 2.5 M 0.2 M 0.7 M 7.5 F 1.2 M 0.9 Percentage of exams failed 2.2 7.1 5.7 6.4 0.0 2.6 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A D n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.2 8.4 7.9 8.0 8.5 8.8

St. William School [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 26Parents average education (yrs): 15.5 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 12.9 Rank: 19 / 766 98 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 70.6 71.0 75.0 75.6 72.4 77.6 Math 73.2 76.6 78.3 75.3 78.8 81.6 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 68.7 65.6 75.7 70.0 75.2 77.0 Math 66.6 72.3 76.6 72.8 80.3 84.5 upGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 2.9 M 9.7 F 3.6 F 9.3 F 6.5 M 0.5 Math M 7.5 M 17.8 M 0.7 F 0.9 M 2.5 M 2.6 Percentage of exams failed 12.8 10.8 6.5 8.5 0.9 0.0 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B A n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.0 5.8 8.0 6.8 7.9 8.8


Glenmore Christian Academy [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 51Parents average education (yrs): 15.4 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 26 / 766 7 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 74.4 78.3 79.3 85.1 85.7 79.6 Math 78.7 83.6 88.6 90.3 88.7 87.2 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 76.5 79.6 78.2 77.9 76.6 77.2 down Math 77.1 79.1 87.0 79.9 81.5 81.1 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 0.3 F 4.4 F 5.0 F 3.5 F 1.7 F 2.4 Math M 3.4 F 4.1 F 4.2 M 5.6 M 6.0 F 2.8 Percentage of exams failed 3.0 3.2 1.0 1.0 2.2 2.0 down3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B C n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.3 8.9 9.0 9.1 9.0 8.7

Bearspaw Christian School [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 36Parents average education (yrs): 15.2 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.4 Rank: 26 / 766 166 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 72.4 74.7 75.0 75.2 81.5 Math n/a 69.6 80.3 72.2 74.4 82.7 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 69.1 76.9 72.6 75.9 75.4 Math n/a 62.1 74.6 71.8 79.6 84.6 upGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a F 6.6 F 4.4 M 0.4 F 2.7 F 2.8 Math n/a M 9.6 M 5.4 M 17.4 M 6.0 M 1.9 Percentage of exams failed n/a 21.7 6.8 9.8 5.3 1.4 up3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a 5.4 7.6 6.2 7.6 8.7

Lycee Louis Pasteur [Private] Gr 6 Enrolment: 21Parents average education (yrs): 15.8 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.1 Rank: 26 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 76.9 n/a n/a 76.8 n/a 76.4 n/a Math 77.7 n/a n/a 88.0 n/a 82.5 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 70.1 n/a n/a 76.6 n/a 82.3 n/a Math 72.1 n/a n/a 69.2 n/a 86.6 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts M 6.7 n/a n/a F 14.1 n/a F 1.1 n/a Math M 13.7 n/a n/a F 27.6 n/a M 0.4 n/aPercentage of exams failed 6.2 n/a n/a 2.4 n/a 2.2 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.5 n/a n/a 6.0 n/a 8.7 n/a

Prince of Wales School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 46Parents average education (yrs): 15.3 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.6 Rank: 33 / 766 13 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 76.8 76.9 75.8 78.4 78.5 79.7 Math 85.3 80.5 86.8 86.2 82.7 84.7 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 74.8 73.6 75.4 77.5 75.1 74.3 Math 75.9 81.0 77.8 77.4 82.6 88.1 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 4.9 F 0.1 F 5.2 F 7.1 M 0.3 F 3.5 Math F 0.7 M 4.4 M 1.2 M 3.7 M 2.9 F 1.1 Percentage of exams failed 3.6 4.2 5.6 4.1 2.0 3.1 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B C n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B A n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.4 8.7 8.2 8.2 8.6 8.6

Rosedale Elementary Junior High School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 31Parents average education (yrs): 17.0 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.5 Rank: 33 / 766 64 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 72.5 70.5 73.3 79.7 75.5 80.6 Math 79.1 72.1 80.3 82.0 75.0 83.9 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 75.8 79.6 75.2 76.1 71.5 77.9 Math 76.6 83.7 81.4 74.4 78.5 84.2 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 3.0 F 5.7 F 4.6 F 7.2 F 14.5 F 4.1 Math M 0.4 M 6.8 F 2.9 M 2.4 F 7.7 M 5.0 Percentage of exams failed 4.5 8.6 3.3 3.8 7.3 0.9 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a D B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C B n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.0 7.7 8.1 8.0 6.5 8.6

John Costello Catholic School [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 77Parents average education (yrs): 15.9 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 9.8 Rank: 37 / 766 24 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 72.9 72.6 77.2 81.2 81.1 77.1 Math 77.1 77.0 82.1 84.6 84.5 85.2 upGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 75.1 74.0 73.8 78.1 74.6 76.7 Math 74.5 75.7 79.9 83.0 87.4 85.3 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 1.8 F 6.3 F 12.5 F 4.1 F 9.8 F 2.4 Math M 8.0 F 3.0 M 0.3 M 5.2 M 0.3 M 4.1 Percentage of exams failed 8.0 5.2 2.3 2.4 2.7 2.4 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.1 7.8 8.0 8.7 8.5 8.5 up

Earl Grey School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 28Parents average education (yrs): 17.4 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 63.6 Rank: 37 / 766 24 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.1 75.5 75.5 82.8 72.9 79.4 Math 80.1 82.0 82.1 85.2 83.9 90.5 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.0 74.0 78.3 79.7 79.6 65.9 Math 75.6 77.0 80.6 82.6 86.6 84.7 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts M 5.7 F 10.1 F 4.9 F 6.1 F 3.8 n/a n/a Math M 5.2 F 6.3 M 6.3 F 3.9 M 4.8 n/a n/aPercentage of exams failed 3.7 5.0 3.5 1.0 1.7 2.5 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B D n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.6 7.7 8.1 8.9 8.5 8.5

Cardinal Newman Elementary Junior High School [Separate] Gr 6 Enrolment: 124Parents average education (yrs): 14.5 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 37 / 766 30 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 72.4 69.9 74.3 80.8 74.3 77.8 Math 82.4 75.8 86.2 86.5 79.7 85.3 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 71.9 73.1 73.6 75.4 71.7 75.1 Math 77.8 80.6 79.0 80.0 83.3 80.9 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 7.9 F 2.2 F 3.3 F 5.1 F 3.5 F 0.8 Math M 0.6 M 2.6 M 4.7 M 3.0 F 1.8 M 2.2 Percentage of exams failed 7.0 6.9 3.4 2.0 3.6 3.3 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A B n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.6 8.0 8.1 8.6 8.0 8.5

Chinook Park School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 66Parents average education (yrs): 16.6 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 4.3 Rank: 37 / 766 37 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 74.5 74.4 74.4 75.6 76.3 77.7 Math 80.7 84.3 85.4 82.1 84.6 86.6 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 69.3 73.1 70.1 73.3 73.0 75.5 Math 66.6 81.7 75.3 76.7 83.7 81.8 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a F 4.4 F 2.2 F 6.3 F 1.7 F 1.3 Math M 5.8 M 8.5 M 0.9 F 8.4 F 0.5 M 3.0 Percentage of exams failed 8.8 5.0 4.7 5.9 2.8 2.6 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C C n/aOverall rating out of 10 6.7 8.0 7.9 7.3 8.6 8.5

Rosemont School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 25Parents average education (yrs): 16.1 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.0 Rank: 43 / 766 113 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 67.4 71.8 75.5 78.4 78.3 up Math n/a 68.8 75.4 82.0 74.2 81.6 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a 74.6 76.6 72.1 71.7 77.0 Math n/a 72.8 73.8 72.1 74.0 77.9 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a F 8.6 n/a F 4.3 F 3.2 F 0.2 n/a Math n/a M 10.8 n/a M 6.2 M 1.0 F 1.4 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a 8.6 11.0 4.0 8.2 4.2 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C C n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a 6.5 7.1 7.4 7.4 8.4 up


Thorncliffe School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 40Parents average education (yrs): 14.1 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 1.5 Rank: 43 / 766 142 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 75.3 66.8 71.9 74.5 71.8 73.6 Math 82.9 73.2 84.3 81.5 74.4 84.7 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 71.1 65.4 63.8 68.5 76.9 74.0 up Math 70.3 64.9 65.7 72.1 86.5 84.4 upGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a M 0.5 F 9.4 F 6.5 F 0.5 F 1.0 Math n/a M 3.4 M 3.2 F 3.0 M 3.9 F 3.3 Percentage of exams failed 3.3 17.4 16.5 2.6 4.7 0.8 up3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.0 6.2 6.1 7.4 8.0 8.4 up

Sunalta Elementary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 31Parents average education (yrs): 16.5 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 9.8 Rank: 43 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a 73.1 86.9 76.8 74.7 n/a Math n/a n/a 83.7 91.2 82.4 78.7 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a 77.1 73.8 75.3 75.3 n/a Math n/a n/a 85.4 74.7 86.9 84.0 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a n/a F 10.6 F 6.1 n/a F 0.9 n/a Math n/a n/a F 4.3 F 6.1 n/a M 1.0 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a n/a 0.0 1.3 1.6 1.0 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a B n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a n/a 8.2 8.7 8.8 8.4 n/a

West Dalhousie Elementary [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 48Parents average education (yrs): 15.8 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 2.6 Rank: 52 / 766 12 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 81.7 78.8 74.9 76.9 76.6 75.8 Math 90.5 85.9 84.6 81.0 76.1 85.4 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 80.1 80.3 77.5 76.4 73.8 78.4 Math 84.4 89.7 84.0 78.7 82.5 85.1 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 3.2 M 2.9 F 5.6 F 0.9 F 4.5 M 2.0 Math M 2.4 M 5.8 F 4.8 M 2.1 F 2.1 M 10.1 Percentage of exams failed 0.5 0.0 1.1 2.1 1.9 2.2 down3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a C A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a C A n/aOverall rating out of 10 9.6 9.6 8.5 8.5 8.0 8.3 down

Jennie Elliott School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 62Parents average education (yrs): 15.2 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 10.3 Rank: 52 / 766 30 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.7 79.5 77.9 83.0 80.0 77.4 Math 77.4 82.3 84.6 88.2 84.6 80.1 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 73.5 76.5 69.5 79.1 73.6 77.0 Math 73.8 81.9 75.2 78.4 84.7 84.1 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 5.0 F 5.3 F 14.2 F 7.3 F 2.8 F 2.4 Math F 7.1 M 6.7 F 9.8 M 4.5 F 2.1 M 4.2 Percentage of exams failed 5.8 2.7 8.1 1.9 2.9 2.6 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a C B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/aOverall rating out of 10 7.2 8.7 6.8 8.7 8.6 8.3

Edgemont School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 110Parents average education (yrs): 15.7 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 0.0 Rank: 52 / 766 30 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 75.9 70.9 75.7 73.9 74.9 76.3 Math 80.4 77.0 84.7 82.0 84.2 82.8 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 75.5 76.2 72.5 76.5 71.8 76.3 Math 79.3 83.2 79.4 77.5 81.2 84.0 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 0.6 F 6.6 F 3.1 F 4.7 F 4.1 F 6.2 Math M 8.1 F 1.5 M 0.4 M 4.1 M 1.7 M 1.2 Percentage of exams failed 4.1 6.6 3.7 3.8 3.5 1.4 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a B B n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.1 8.1 8.4 7.9 8.1 8.3

Woodbine Elementary School [Public] Gr 6 Enrolment: 98Parents average education (yrs): 15.4 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 3.2 Rank: 52 / 766 37 / 647Academic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 76.6 73.3 73.5 75.4 74.0 75.2 Math 83.1 85.7 86.9 82.2 84.4 83.6 Gr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts 78.6 74.0 77.5 76.0 76.5 76.0 Math 76.9 77.8 79.9 78.9 86.4 83.9 Gr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts F 3.2 F 2.8 F 3.5 F 4.1 M 8.0 F 4.2 Math M 1.4 M 2.7 M 5.4 F 4.2 M 9.0 F 1.4 Percentage of exams failed 1.2 6.9 2.6 5.9 3.7 3.3 3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a A A n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a A B n/aOverall rating out of 10 8.7 8.3 8.3 7.9 7.8 8.3

ABC Charter Public School [Charter] Gr 6 Enrolment: 68Parents average education (yrs): 15.2 2001-02 Last 5 Years% NonWriters: 3.0 Rank: 52 / 766 n/aAcademic Performance 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 TrendGr 3 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a 80.9 77.7 79.9 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a 85.1 83.0 80.8 n/aGr 6 Avg exam mark Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a 78.4 75.7 77.7 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a 77.7 92.3 84.4 n/aGr 6 gender gap Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a F 1.2 F 7.2 F 6.4 n/a Math n/a n/a n/a M 11.1 M 0.5 M 1.5 n/aPercentage of exams failed n/a n/a n/a 2.1 1.0 3.4 n/a3-year Value added Lang. Arts n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Math n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/aOverall rating out of 10 n/a n/a n/a 8.3 8.7 8.3 n/a

STUDIES IN EDUCATION POLICY - Fraser Institute...To order additional copies of Studies in Education...

Documents

Transcript of STUDIES IN EDUCATION POLICY - Fraser Institute...To order additional copies of Studies in Education...